Stop me from buying an M6 Mk ii before Canon stops the M line

R2D2 said:

m100 said:

R2D2 said:

Personally I don’t see you needing anything beyond the M6ii at this point then… unless you just gotta have that IBIS.

R2

Click to expand...

Why the R7 for the 100 L ? What do you plan to shoot with that combo ?

Click to expand...

Bugs bugs and more bugs! :-D

15 fps with my MT-26EX-RT Macro Twin Flash, or 30 fps with my pair of Aputure Amaran F7 LED's...


(Shown on my M6ii). Highly recommend these lights for Focus Bracketing (or cherry-picking your focal plane).

R2

Click to expand...

Bug portraits ! Wow !

Next question. How do y'all get them to pose ? Are most of them dead ?

--
Dr. says listen to this every morning.

m100 said:

R2D2 said:

m100 said:

R2D2 said:

Personally I don’t see you needing anything beyond the M6ii at this point then… unless you just gotta have that IBIS.

R2

Click to expand...

Why the R7 for the 100 L ? What do you plan to shoot with that combo ?

Click to expand...

Bugs bugs and more bugs! :-D

15 fps with my MT-26EX-RT Macro Twin Flash, or 30 fps with my pair of Aputure Amaran F7 LED's...


(Shown on my M6ii). Highly recommend these lights for Focus Bracketing (or cherry-picking your focal plane).

R2

Click to expand...

Bug portraits ! Wow !

Next question. How do y'all get them to pose ? Are most of them dead ?

Click to expand...

Patience. No dead or "frozen" bugs allowed. :-O

This is what I like to shoot...

https://pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/insects

(I haven't updated that gallery in a while tho, sorry).

R2

--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.

m100 said:

MyM6II said:

I think they made a great mistake. Especially with the R10 (and the lenses).

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

They should have made it with an M mount. - Where the lenses are.

m100 said:

The 22mm I could not believe ! Wow, so small and f/2 ? No way !

Click to expand...

My favorite walkabout lens.

m100 said:

Then that 32mm ! What in the world ! Another lens that broke all the rules !

Click to expand...

It is fantastic !!

m100 said:

And the 11-22mm ? Wow again !

Click to expand...

Yes Wow!!!

m100 said:

All three M mount lenses !

Click to expand...

M mount - where the lenses are !

True, possible, but not probable. It is much more likely that companies with smaller market shares like Olympus and Panasonic will "bite the dust" first.

IoannisZ said:

Wait till you see prices and possibilities of the new camera. In a few months everyone will sell their old cameras and lenses at half price. You don't miss any opportunity don't buying now.

Click to expand...

+1

I hesitate myself, but I think it's better to wait a couple of months, the second-hand prices should go down by then... unless you want it new, then it's probably time to buy.

If Canon made any "mistake" with the M line, it was with the M mount, in the first place. There really was no reason to go to a smaller than 54 mm lens mount diameter, except that Canon never foresaw mirrorless cameras displacing SLRs. The M was intended to compete with Four-Thirds.



Ten years later, we can see the writing on the wall. Canon is attempting to close an unfortunate chapter in their history, has shifted back to 54 mm lenses with the RF mount, is now producing APS-C cameras in the R line, and will in short order discontinue the M line because it simply does not make economic sense to continue to make three different lens mounts. As it stands, Canon has released no new M lenses in four years.



The R line cannot replace the M line...yet. But it soon will. That doesn't mean the M line isn't capable of great photography, and as of obsolescence, well, my 1977 Nikon FM body still works. Not that I expect digital cameras of 2022 to still be functional in 45 years (the FM is fully mechanical aside from the light meter), but they will still be great cameras for some time to come.



I won't tell you not to buy an M6mkII, if it does what you need it to do, today and for the foreseeable future. I myself am trying to justify *not* buying an M50mkII and EF-M 22 mm f/2 STM.

fuyume said:

If Canon made any "mistake" with the M line, it was with the M mount, in the first place. There really was no reason to go to a smaller than 54 mm lens mount diameter, except that Canon never foresaw mirrorless cameras displacing SLRs. The M was intended to compete with Four-Thirds.

Ten years later, we can see the writing on the wall. Canon is attempting to close an unfortunate chapter in their history, has shifted back to 54 mm lenses with the RF mount, is now producing APS-C cameras in the R line, and will in short order discontinue the M line because it simply does not make economic sense to continue to make three different lens mounts. As it stands, Canon has released no new M lenses in four years.

The R line cannot replace the M line...yet. But it soon will. That doesn't mean the M line isn't capable of great photography, and as of obsolescence, well, my 1977 Nikon FM body still works. Not that I expect digital cameras of 2022 to still be functional in 45 years (the FM is fully mechanical aside from the light meter), but they will still be great cameras for some time to come.

I won't tell you not to buy an M6mkII, if it does what you need it to do, today and for the foreseeable future. I myself am trying to justify *not* buying an M50mkII and EF-M 22 mm f/2 STM.

Click to expand...

people keep saying writing is on the wall and soon, but then they want one ...

...and there is nothing else like having one

hmm, maybe that writing on the wall ain't going to happen, at least not soon or in short order

fuyume said:

If Canon made any "mistake" with the M line, it was with the M mount, in the first place. There really was no reason to go to a smaller than 54 mm lens mount diameter, except that Canon never foresaw mirrorless cameras displacing SLRs. The M was intended to compete with Four-Thirds.

Ten years later, we can see the writing on the wall. Canon is attempting to close an unfortunate chapter in their history, has shifted back to 54 mm lenses with the RF mount, is now producing APS-C cameras in the R line, and will in short order discontinue the M line because it simply does not make economic sense to continue to make three different lens mounts. As it stands, Canon has released no new M lenses in four years.

The R line cannot replace the M line...yet. But it soon will. That doesn't mean the M line isn't capable of great photography, and as of obsolescence, well, my 1977 Nikon FM body still works. Not that I expect digital cameras of 2022 to still be functional in 45 years (the FM is fully mechanical aside from the light meter), but they will still be great cameras for some time to come.

Click to expand...

I could not disagree more. I think it was a brilliant move by Canon.

fuyume said:

I won't tell you not to buy an M6mkII, if it does what you need it to do, today and for the foreseeable future. I myself am trying to justify *not* buying an M50mkII and EF-M 22 mm f/2 STM.

Click to expand...

I’d recommend getting some of that M System sweetness for yourself before you talk yourself out of it! ;-)

Actually experience some of that Goodness that some of us have been for many years now! :-D

R2

Hello @gaul.

If may pose your question back to you: "What is it about the future of the M line that concerns you?"

• The firmware was already updated 2 years ago to support 24fps video;
• There is an amazing 50mm equivalent prime lens (EF-M 32mm 1.4) available;
• There is an adaptor available if you want to (re)use EF lenses;
• Viltrox sells a speed booster if you want "full-frame" look;
• Sigma sells 3 prime lenses of varying focal lengths to suit our needs;

If your want/need and budget fit this brand and model, then I say go for it. I took the leap 3 years ago and have never looked back.

If your priority is after-sales value, then maybe you are better off looking at other brands' APSC models. That, or just get a pre-loved gear if you're planning on replacing it again later anyway...

Wow @shuutr!

I just got the Sigma 16mm for my M6 Mk II and am seriously considering the 56mm as well.

I will be carrying it in an Aer City Sling 2 (scheduled to arrive this weekend), which was inspired by Ben Bjurstrom's video on Favorite Sling Bags for Mirrorless Cameras . :-D

I can do this because I only have 1 camera, unlike you.

Tsumabukis said:

Wow @shuutr!

I just got the Sigma 16mm for my M6 Mk II and am seriously considering the 56mm as well.

I will be carrying it in an Aer City Sling 2 (scheduled to arrive this weekend), which was inspired by Ben Bjurstrom's video on Favorite Sling Bags for Mirrorless Cameras . :-D

I can do this because I only have 1 camera, unlike you.

Click to expand...

I have Mk I and II and I have pretty tiny shoulderbag which fits them both

fuyume said:

...

Ten years later, we can see the writing on the wall. Canon is attempting to close an unfortunate chapter in their history, has shifted back to 54 mm lenses with the RF mount, is now producing APS-C cameras in the R line, and will in short order discontinue the M line because it simply does not make economic sense to continue to make three different lens mounts. As it stands, Canon has released no new M lenses in four years.

...

Click to expand...

Why do you call this chapter unfortunate?

Unfortunate for whom?

They have sold millions of M bodies and lenses and it's not finished yet: people are still buying them, most users only buy the kit (body + kit lens), they don't care about the mount diameter or a possible extension.

I think many forum users here worry too much about the future generally and more particularly about gear they are going to buy next... instead of enjoying their actual gear and taking pictures.

R2D2 said:

fuyume said:

If Canon made any "mistake" with the M line, it was with the M mount, in the first place. There really was no reason to go to a smaller than 54 mm lens mount diameter, except that Canon never foresaw mirrorless cameras displacing SLRs. The M was intended to compete with Four-Thirds.

Ten years later, we can see the writing on the wall. Canon is attempting to close an unfortunate chapter in their history, has shifted back to 54 mm lenses with the RF mount, is now producing APS-C cameras in the R line, and will in short order discontinue the M line because it simply does not make economic sense to continue to make three different lens mounts. As it stands, Canon has released no new M lenses in four years.

The R line cannot replace the M line...yet. But it soon will. That doesn't mean the M line isn't capable of great photography, and as of obsolescence, well, my 1977 Nikon FM body still works. Not that I expect digital cameras of 2022 to still be functional in 45 years (the FM is fully mechanical aside from the light meter), but they will still be great cameras for some time to come.

Click to expand...

I could not disagree more. I think it was a brilliant move by Canon.

R2D2 said:

I won't tell you not to buy an M6mkII, if it does what you need it to do, today and for the foreseeable future. I myself am trying to justify *not* buying an M50mkII and EF-M 22 mm f/2 STM.

Click to expand...

I’d recommend getting some of that M System sweetness for yourself before you talk yourself out of it! ;-)

Actually experience some of that Goodness that some of us have been for many years now! :-D

R2

Click to expand...

Maybe I didn't make myself quite clear. Right now, I have no real investment in any particular system, and the more I look, the more it becomes clear that the right camera and lens for me right now is the M50 Mk II with the EF-M 22 mm f/2 STM. I keep looking for reasons to say otherwise, and I keep not finding them.

Creating the M system in 2012 may have seemed like the right move at the right time, and that's why I put "mistake" in quotes. It wasn't a mistake, clearly, given the state of the market at the time.

But a decade later, the M system just doesn't make sense for the next decade, from a manufacturing standpoint. That doesn't invalidate it as an excellent system for a lot of people, including me.

fuyume said:

R2D2 said:

fuyume said:

If Canon made any "mistake" with the M line, it was with the M mount, in the first place. There really was no reason to go to a smaller than 54 mm lens mount diameter, except that Canon never foresaw mirrorless cameras displacing SLRs. The M was intended to compete with Four-Thirds.

Ten years later, we can see the writing on the wall. Canon is attempting to close an unfortunate chapter in their history, has shifted back to 54 mm lenses with the RF mount, is now producing APS-C cameras in the R line, and will in short order discontinue the M line because it simply does not make economic sense to continue to make three different lens mounts. As it stands, Canon has released no new M lenses in four years.

The R line cannot replace the M line...yet. But it soon will. That doesn't mean the M line isn't capable of great photography, and as of obsolescence, well, my 1977 Nikon FM body still works. Not that I expect digital cameras of 2022 to still be functional in 45 years (the FM is fully mechanical aside from the light meter), but they will still be great cameras for some time to come.

Click to expand...

I could not disagree more. I think it was a brilliant move by Canon.

fuyume said:

I won't tell you not to buy an M6mkII, if it does what you need it to do, today and for the foreseeable future. I myself am trying to justify *not* buying an M50mkII and EF-M 22 mm f/2 STM.

Click to expand...

I’d recommend getting some of that M System sweetness for yourself before you talk yourself out of it! ;-)

Actually experience some of that Goodness that some of us have been for many years now! :-D

R2

Click to expand...

Maybe I didn't make myself quite clear. Right now, I have no real investment in any particular system, and the more I look, the more it becomes clear that the right camera and lens for me right now is the M50 Mk II with the EF-M 22 mm f/2 STM. I keep looking for reasons to say otherwise, and I keep not finding them.
Creating the M system in 2012 may have seemed like the right move at the right time, and that's why I put "mistake" in quotes. It wasn't a mistake, clearly, given the state of the market at the time.
But a decade later, the M system just doesn't make sense for the next decade, from a manufacturing standpoint.

Click to expand...

they have you interested in small goodness

it must make manufacturing sense then

fuyume said:

That doesn't invalidate it as an excellent system for a lot of people, including me.

Click to expand...

though the writing may seem to be on the wall, in the end, customer purchases will speak

we don't want bigger

"We don't want bigger".

Bigger…what? Camera bodies? Sure, of course. But moving back to a 54 mm lens mount from the abject mistake of 47 mm does not mean that the camera body is necessarily going to be significantly larger. If Canon can make a Rebel SL3, then they can make an R50. And of course, if Canon can make the EF 40 mm f/2.8 STM and the EF-S 24 mm f/2 STM, then they can do similar lenses for the RF mount.

M50 body size: 116 x 88 x 59 mm
SL3 body size: 122 x 93 x 70 mm
R10 body size: 123 x 88 x 83 mm


The R10 is not intended to be the most compact camera in the RF line the way the SL3 is the most compact body in the SLR line. Nor is the R10 meant to be the most affordable camera in Canon's lineup. The SL3 and M50 Mk II are roughly competitive on price, but the R10 is a bracket higher.


Whether or not something is popular in the marketplace says nothing about the relative cost structure to a manufacturer of maintaining two completely separate and incompatible production lines that duplicate features.


APS-C RF mount cameras are just barely hitting the market, and Canon is not going to target the low end of the market with a new platform. I expect by next year, or possibly 2024, depending on internal processes at Canon, we will see an even cheaper and more compact RF mount camera to replace the M50 Mk II.


In the meantime, the M50 Mk II will continue to be a great camera hampered by a limited lens selection, while the RF mount is clearly the future for Canon.

--
fuyume (f)

And I should think Nikon's new Z30 is the shot across the bow for an M6 replacement.

Z30: 128 x 74 x 60 mm
M6 Mk II: 120 x 70 x 49 mm

Canon can do this, too, with an RF mount.

fuyume said:

In the meantime, the M50 Mk II will continue to be a great camera hampered by a limited lens selection, while the RF mount is clearly the future for Canon.

Click to expand...

yeah right, do you think R50 users will have access to

RF-s 32 f1.4 (how many F1.4 great lenses has EF-s developed?_)

RF-s 56 f1.4 (do you think Canon wants to let siggy in?)

RF-s 16 f1.4 (do you think Canon will make great quality lenses that would compete with their FF?)

RF-s 30 f1.4 (and what about Fuji and Sony that have these siigy primes as well as the siggy 18-50 F2.8)

RF-s 11-22 (do you really think they want folks buying this lens versus buying their FF line?)

yeah right, they theoretically could make a smaller body, but don't disparage the M lens lineup until we see all of the apsc lenses above - this theory ain't going to happen - it didn't happen with EF-s, and it ain't going to happen with RF-s - why? Because Canon wants to sell you FF glass!!!

MAC said:

RF-s 32 f1.4 (how many F1.4 great lenses has EF-s developed?_)

RF-s 56 f1.4 (do you think Canon wants to let siggy in?)

RF-s 16 f1.4 (do you think Canon will make great quality lenses that would compete with their FF?)

RF-s 30 f1.4 (and what about Fuji and Sony that have these siigy primes as well as the siggy 18-50 F2.8)

RF-s 11-22 (do you really think they want folks buying this lens versus buying their FF line?)

yeah right, they theoretically could make a smaller body, but don't disparage the M lens lineup until we see all of the apsc lenses above - this theory ain't going to happen - it didn't happen with EF-s, and it ain't going to happen with RF-s - why? Because Canon wants to sell you FF glass!!!

Click to expand...

I’m not going to disagree with your basic premise that the Canon EF-M and EF-S lines have holes in them.

However, I will quibble over some of the details. EF-S users have the EF 50/1.8, EF 50/1.4, or EF 50/1.2L (in place of a 56/1.4), the EF-S 10-18 and 11-22, and EF 28/1.8, 35/2, or 35/1.4L (in place of a 30/1.4 or 32/1.4). You are correct that there are no Canon EF or EF-S fast primes at 16 mm.

Regards,

Alan

Alan WF said:

Alan WF said:

RF-s 32 f1.4 (how many F1.4 great lenses has EF-s developed?_)

RF-s 56 f1.4 (do you think Canon wants to let siggy in?)

RF-s 16 f1.4 (do you think Canon will make great quality lenses that would compete with their FF?)

RF-s 30 f1.4 (and what about Fuji and Sony that have these siigy primes as well as the siggy 18-50 F2.8)

RF-s 11-22 (do you really think they want folks buying this lens versus buying their FF line?)

yeah right, they theoretically could make a smaller body, but don't disparage the M lens lineup until we see all of the apsc lenses above - this theory ain't going to happen - it didn't happen with EF-s, and it ain't going to happen with RF-s - why? Because Canon wants to sell you FF glass!!!

Click to expand...

I’m not going to disagree with your basic premise that the Canon EF-M and EF-S lines have holes in them.

However, I will quibble over some of the details. EF-S users have the EF 50/1.8, EF 50/1.4, or EF 50/1.2L (in place of a 56/1.4),

Click to expand...

I had one 50 f1.4 -- you had to stop down to f2.8 to be sharp

I had two 50 f1.8 - you had to stop down to f2.8 to be sharp

the EF 50 f1.2 is sharp at f2 and has fringing

On crop, you are better off with the sharp wide open siggy 56 f1.4

Alan WF said:

the EF-S 10-18 and 11-22,

Click to expand...

I had the 10-18 and gave it away -- the 11-22 is a lot better

Alan WF said:

and EF 28/1.8,

Click to expand...

Alan WF said:

35/2, or 35/1.4L

Click to expand...

heavy stuff - the 32 f1.4 runs circles around these on crop

Alan WF said:

(in place of a 30/1.4 or 32/1.4). You are correct that there are no Canon EF or EF-S fast primes at 16 mm.

Click to expand...

the 55-250 stm lives up to IQ -- but m mount lenses are better than what you are suggesting

Alan WF said:

Regards,

Alan

Click to expand...

MAC said:

m mount lenses are better than what you are suggesting

Click to expand...

Yes, I would agree that EF-M lenses are often superior to EF lenses adapted to EF-S.

My point is that Canon did not produce fast 30 or 50 mm lenses specifically for EF-S because they had somewhat adequate equivalents in EF. That is, the holes in EF-S are smaller than one might think if one considers only EF-S lenses. It wasn't just neglect or a desire to push EF-S users to full-frame.

Regards,

Alan